To the editor:
With the several letters referring to Christmas on the Opinion page this week, the Churchianity and religiosity of the subject is well covered.
However I’d like to throw in my two cents for those that look at Christmas from a different perspective. Actually folks, I’d like to add a few words to the view expressed by Pastor Slyman in his Midweek Musings column (the Times, Wednesday, Dec. 5).
From where I stand, historically, no one knows the date of the Nativity. What is known for sure is that it is not Dec. 25th. If you take the time to explore the origins of all that is associated with Christmas, you will find that all the symbols come out of a pagan culture, having nothing to do with Jesus.
Why, you can find a description of that beautiful Christmas Tree that many make the focal point of their home, and stack all kinds of beautifully wrapped gifts around, in the Bible (Jeremiah, 10:3;) if you read that passage, please do so in reading the context.
But getting back to the Nativity and the birth of the Christ. What we are sure of is the place, Bethlehem, and that the shepherds were in the fields with their flocks all night. That happens only twice a year, either late spring or early fall, as those are the periods in which the sheep give birth and the shepherds are with them to help in the birthing process if needed.
We are also told that the Christ Child was wrapped in swaddling clothes and laying in a manger. There were no wise men present at the manger; they honored the babe in his house.
Therefore, my friends, with so many of the symbols of Christmas having no basis in truth, but just the trappings of men that chose the Winter Solstice as an arbitrary date to increase the Roman Empire, we find ourselves in a dilemma.